Piermont development plan draws criticism from some residents, county

A proposed housing development in Piermont the village is moving forward with is drawing criticism from residents and county officials for violating zoning codes and environmental laws.

Since 2021, Piermont Development LLC has been trying to gain approval for a 14-unit multifamily complex on a small lot directly across from Village Hall.

But on Monday, April 8, over 50 town residents packed into the small village board room to express their concerns about the dealings behind the approval of the land.

Residents raise concerns with the lot

Some residents, like Piermont Assistant Fire Chief Dan Goswick, are concerned about overcrowding and environmental issues, but also wish for more affordable housing to be built in the village instead.

"The problem that I keep telling everybody about in this village, especially the realtors is, they’re driving the middle class out of here," he said. "And when you drive the middle class out of here, you drive out all the people that ride the ambulance and go on fire calls."

In 2021, Piermont Developers LLC submitted a request for a zone change to accommodate an 18,000-square-foot building with three stories and parking for nearly 30 cars.

At the planning board meeting Monday, there was no mention of required affordable housing units planned for the proposed development.

Goswick said that the lot used to be the spot of a gas station and demanded for soil testing before any approval of the building or the site.

447-477 Piermont Avenue, a lot normally used for absorbing parking overflow on busy village days, was situated in a residential mixed-use zone that does not align with the type of development proposed.

The zone proposal was rejected by the Rockland County Planning Board because of "spot zoning" and environmental concerns.

Village vs. county

However, Village of Piermont attorney Lino Sciaretta contested that the 30-day period for approval had passed by the time the Rockland County Planning Board responded with a statement of disapproval, allowing the village to successfully pass a local law in March 2023 that changed the zone to a mixed-use commercial business zone to allow the development of the property despite all of the concerns with the space.

Piermont mayor Bruce Tucker said the changing of the zone had "nothing to do with the development" and was in the works for some time.

"We actually hired a land consulting firm (Nelson Pope of Suffern) to take a look at our downtown district and they came back and said that most of the buildings in our downtown district don’t even fit in with the current zoning because a lot of these buildings are old," Tucker said.

At the board meeting Monday, Planning Board chair Daniel Spitzer further explained the decision to rezone the downtown area.

"The entire downtown district had a set of zones attached to it that needed special approval for absolutely anything that was done down here, because nothing conformed whatsoever," he said. "The village, by law, needs to have a comprehensive plan and decided that it was time to create [one]."

Spitzer said the zoning was created to make at least 80% conformity of the buildings in the zone.

"You can’t have 0% because then everything needs to be by special permit again and you’ve achieved nothing," he said. "Unless you have a zone law that regulation could apply to enough of the structures, then you have nothing. You have no precedent. Everything just becomes haphazard."

Sciaretta said that the developer's dismissal of the disapproval of the commercial business zone is legal because of the time constraint attached to planning board and development comments.

"With respect to the general municipal law, I believe that it’s been satisfied because of all it requires of us is to mail it. There’s no requirement that we have to follow up with the county," Sciaretta said. "All you do is postmark, you put it in the mail, and if the county doesn’t respond in 30 days, it’s deemed waived.”

Sciaretta said he submitted a sworn affidavit from village clerk Jennifer DeYorgi Maher, attesting that she sent the general municipal law request on January 10, 2023 and both the town of Orangetown and the village of Grandview-on-Hudson received the document.

"I don’t believe that this has to go and be revoted on again," Sciaretta said. "It’s been done. It’s been adopted by the state. The local law was filed and as soon as the local law was filed, it’s deemed adopted. So if there’s any issues with that, we’ll have to deal with the county at that point."

Residents feel 'left in the dark'

Some Piermont residents said they had no idea this development was even in the works until recently.

Laura Healy Grzner and her husband have lived in the village for over 30 years. She said the village used to update people on what was being built or changed in the town but stopped around five years ago.

“We’d get these notices that this [person] wanted to put an addition on, or this one wanted to build a house and we stopped getting them," Healy Grzner said. "So it was so shocking to find out that this had been going on for five years and no one told us about this. Nothing was sent out. It wasn’t even put in the Piermont flyers that are put out every few months."

Members of Preserve Piermont said their concerns about the development have been met with silence and evasiveness from both the developer's attorney and the village.

In a petition made by Healy Grznar against the development on Change.org, she wrote, "We believe that growth should not come at the expense of our community's character, our local government’s integrity, or environmental sustainability. We also urge our local government officials to share information and materials concerning new laws, land use developments, or other Village matters so that the public can meaningfully participate and comment on what our Village is doing."

Brian Condon, a Rockland County-based lawyer, raised concern about appearance of impropriety regarding Sciaretta, who formerly represented Phil Griffin, the owner of the lot of land in question. Griffin is also owner of Flywheel Park.

However, in response to some village residents requesting he remove himself from planning board hearings about the development due to a conflict of interest, he says that Griffin sold Piermont Developers LLC the land and is no longer involved in any dealings.

"During the course of these past several years, Mr. Griffin has not been before this board as a principal of Piermont Developers LLC and never appeared on this podium or this application since this matter has commenced. So when Mr. Griffin or someone from this LLC has appeared before this board, I have not sat on applications by Mr. Griffin," Sciaretta said. "This board is aware that there’s been conflict counsel that has been appointed and they sit in if Mr. Griffin or anyone else that I represent has a conflict. I don’t see there’s a conflict. I’m not a voting member of this board. I simply advise on the legality of the zoning."

The Village of Piermont appears to be moving forward with development, but the developer of the space still needs approval for the subdivision and site plan from the Village Planning Board and the Village Board of Trustees.

"The character of the town was something that was taken very seriously," said village resident Gavin Markiet. "This proposed building is a monstrosity and if it gets built will damage our town irreversibly forever."

Another public hearing about the space was scheduled for April 16 at Village Hall.

This article originally appeared on Rockland/Westchester Journal News: Piermont NY development plan faces criticism during public comment